Y U NO JS ACTIVATED? JAVASCRIPT DISABLEDWe get it. We often have problems with Javascript ourselves. We also congratulate you on your choice to view the Web safely by turning off scripting. However, to view, navigate, and use this site properly, you must enable Javascript. Otherwise, your experience here will be lacking. (Gets down from soap box.)

Is it ironic that this is published in a UK newspaper? Not so long ago, police used to be called "peace officers." Keeping the peace and initiating violence are contradictions. Wasn't police abuse inevitable considering they hold a monopoly on force and considering the masters that they work for are morally corrupt? Why do we tolerate police being above the law or, put another way, who is watching the watchers?

FTA:

If mine were truly a free country, US police wouldn't wield such immense power or employ such aggressive tactics against their own citizenry - a militarisation of our police forces that started with the war on drugs and intensified after 9/11.

Consider: can you invent a realistic scenario wherein you shoot a man dead; justify it with a story witnesses contradict; confiscate any surveillance video; claim a "glitch" makes it impossible to show the video to anyone else - all while enjoying the support of state legal apparatus?

...[Recording police action is] illegal in 12 states, even (or especially) when you record police misbehaviour. Even in states where it's allowed, officers are wont to ignore the law and go after photographers anyway, and they can always record you with their own dashboard cams...

But in most cases of egregious police overreaction, especially Swat raids in which innocent people are killed, cops aren't going after dangerous hostage-takers, but looking for drugs or serving warrants for other, non-violent crimes...

Police can deprive people of liberty, health or life itself. Surely, we only entrust such authority to those with the intelligence, insight and wisdom to handle such power? Nope...

Robert Jordan applied for a police job in New London and scored 33 on his qualification exam, equivalent to a 125 IQ. That's one standard deviation above the mean - smart, but no genius by any definition. The city refused to hire him, stating a preference for those who scored 27 or lower; the suggested median for a patrol officer was 21. New London's argument was that smart people would find police work boring, and leave the profession after receiving expensive training. Jordan sued for discrimination - and lost. The court ruled there's nothing discriminatory about a city's desire to ensure only C-students get to carry police badges.

We all admire beauty, but the mind ultimately must be stimulated for maximum arousal. Longevity in relationships cannot occur without a meeting of the minds. And that is what Braincrave is: a dating venue where minds meet. Learn about the thoughts of your potential match on deeper topics... topics that spawn your own insights around what you think, the choices you make, and the actions you take.

We are a community of men and women who seek beauty and stimulation through our minds. We find ideas, education, and self-improvement sexy. We think intelligence is hot. But Braincrave is more than brains and I.Q. alone. We are curious. We have common sense. We value and offer wisdom. We experiment. We have great imaginations. We devour literacy. We are intellectually honest. We support and encourage each other to be better.

The Braincrave.com discussion group on Second Life was a twice-daily intellectual group discussions typically held at 12:00 PM SLT (PST) and 7:00 PM SLT. The discussions took place in Second Life group chat but are no longer formally scheduled or managed. The daily articles were used to encourage the discussions.